an open-source thought experiment in psychedelic law and policy

The New York Daily News recently posted an op-ed dismissing as a fraud the proposed medical cannabis law that has languished in the legislature for a decade as other states roar into the future, leaving New York a bumbling blue state backwater. DN’s op-ed essentially and ironically challenged the government to discuss full legalization but it was full of the same decoy arguments, presumably from the DEA playbook, that appear in every statement against a medical cannabis program.Here is the response I sent to the editor. It didn’t get published so I am self-publishing.To the editor:

Although I commend the Daily News for focusing on the proposed New Yorkmedical marijuana law, your November 26 op-ed “New York must not getrolled up in sham medical marijuana debate” is disappointing because itsimply recites the standard inaccurate objections asserted by allopponents of marijuana law reform – even while it proposes a discussionof full legalization.

For example, the claim that the law will fund the “Mexican Mafia” is atypical mischaracterization: the law would place the entire supply side(from cultivation to retail sale) under the control of the StateDepartment of Health – completely unlike the situation in California andother early medical marijuana states. As for creating a regulatorysystem that would be costly to enforce, the proposed law provides forsales tax collection. If the Daily News thinks the tax rate would be toolow to cover expenses, what tax rate would be high enough?

The lack of FDA approval is irrelevant. Federal courts have alreadyruled that the lack of FDA approval does not mean that there is nomedical use. Further, although the FDA has not granted permission tomarket cannabis (that’s all FDA approval is) – that is because theNational Institute on Drug Abuse and the DEA have been obstructing anFDA-compliant clinical trial of marijuana since 2002 by refusing toprovide marijuana to researcher Dr. Donald Abrams in San Francisco.(Also note that the federal government itself has been givingout marijuana to patients for decades under its “Compassionate Use”program – seriously undermining the claim that there is no medical use.)

As for general legalization, the movement for medical use was a directreaction to the way that the government has regulated drugs for 100years. The prohibition of all use of drugs except for medical purposesforced advocates of more rational policies to fight for the minimum –recognition of a medical use. Now that we see that close to twenty yearsof a regulated medical marijuana market in California has not destroyedthe state, other states are moving on to regulation of the marijuanamarket like alcohol.

The Daily News could do a real public service by taking a serious lookat how marijuana law works. If you want to skip over the cautious,gradual process of introducing a medical use system and instead discusshow cannabis could be regulated in New York like alcohol or under some even better system, then let’s do it.

Noah Potter, Esq.Author, New Amsterdam Psychedelic Law BlogFormer Chairman of the NYC Bar Association’s Committee on Drugs and theLaw